linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/deadline: add per rq tracking of admitted bandwidth

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:03:28 +0100
From:	luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	wanpeng.li@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/deadline: add per rq tracking of admitted
 bandwidth

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:53:06 +0100
luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it> wrote:
[...]
> > Please send the patches in a patch series. It is very hard to review
> > patches that are attachments. And our scripts are made to apply
> > patches from mailing lists. Having attachments just makes the job
> > harder.
> 
> Sorry about that; I was in hurry, and I tried to do the quickest
> thing... I'll resend the patches in a more appropriate way on Monday.

Ok; I just re-sent the patches with git sent-email. Hopefully, I
managed to send them as a reply to Juri's original patch, so that the
context of the discussion is not lost.

I just realized that the subjects of the emails say "[*/4]" instead of
"[*/3]" because of a stupid error of mine; I hope this is not a problem
(the patches are sent only for discussion). If this is a problem, I can
resend, of course.

			Thanks (and sorry for the mess),
				Luca